Disputes and confrontational rhetoric have characterized Greek-Turkish relations in recent years. In February 2023 a high magnitude earthquake hit Türkiye  with devastating consequences. Greece’s response was immediate and substantial despite the political enmity between the two countries, which revealed a willingness to cooperate in times of crisis. This cooperation was in fact expedited by the disaster which is why it accounts for a disaster diplomacy case.   This paper aims to test the theoretical proposition that disaster-related activities “have the possibility of catalyzing diplomatic action” (Kelman, 2012:14). This case study examines the dynamics of the two countries on three different levels before the earthquake and the ways in which disaster diplomacy has catalyzed their relations. By building on Kenneth Waltz’s well-established, three-images framework of analysis (1959), both countries have been investigated concerning their decision makers, the internal structure of the two states, as well as their international presence.   By analyzing the three images of Greece and Türkiye  it is evident that the earthquake has in fact stimulated the relations of the two countries in all three levels. The sense of urgency generated by the earthquake has created a window of opportunity for dialogue. The confrontational so far situation was abruptly disturbed by the disaster and an immediate shift in sentiment can be observed. While the findings of this research confirm the theoretical proposition that disaster diplomacy can indeed act as a catalyst for cooperation between the two countries, it also acknowledges the need for further exploration to assess the long-term potential of disaster diplomacy as a conflict resolution tool.

The aim of this study has been to analyse the Norwegian climate discourse and itsimplications on disaster diplomacy between the member states of the Arctic Council. For the purpose of this study, disaster diplomacy refers to the occurrence ofcooperation to address the disaster that is climate change. The Arctic was chosen asthe subject due to it being one of the regions most affected by climate change, whichcreates threats to Arctic societies and ecosystems. The concept of disaster diplomacy and John S. Dryzek’s classifications of climatediscourses form the theoretical framework of this study. The analysis was conductedusing a qualitative textual analysis and found that the Norwegian climate discourse ispredominantly environmentalist, seeking proactive measures to mitigate climaterelatedconsequences. Thus, the Norwegian climate discourse can be assumed to createfavourable conditions for disaster diplomacy. However, certain climate-related issuesrisk causing challenges for disaster diplomacy amongst the member states of the ArcticCouncil.